FAILURE OF TELEOLOGY. 73 



Linnaeus, Cuvier, and Agassi z, the principal representatives 

 of the dualistic hypothesis of creation, could not arrive at a 

 more satisfactory view, we may take it as evidence of the 

 insufficiency of all those conceptions which would derive 

 the various forms of organic nature from a creation of 

 individual species. 



Some naturalists, indeed, seeing the complete insuffi- 

 ciency of these views, have tried to replace the idea of a 

 personal Creator by that of an unconsciously active and 

 creative Force of Nature ; yet this expression is evidently 

 merely an evasive phrase, as long as it is not clearly shown 

 what this force of nature is, and how it works. Hence 

 these attempts, also, have been absolute failures. In fact, 

 whenever an independent origin of the different forms of 

 animals and plants has been assumed, naturalists have 

 fomid themselves compelled to fall back upon so many "acts 

 of creation," that is, on supernatural interferences of the 

 Creator in the natural course of things, which in all other 

 cases goes on without interference. 



It is true that several teleological naturalists, feeling 

 the scientific insufficiency of a supernatural " creation !' 

 have endeavoured to save the hypothesis by wishing it to 

 be understood that creation "is nothing else than a way of 

 coming into being, unknown and inconceivable to us." The 

 eminent Fritz Miiller has cut off from this sophistic evasion 

 every chance of escape by the following striking remark : — 

 " It is intended here only to express in a disguised manner 

 the shamefaced confession, that they neither have, nor care 

 to have, any ojpinion about the origin of species. Accord- 

 ing to this explanation of the word, we might as well speak 

 of the creation of cholera, or syphilis, of the creation of a 



